Pretty amusing and insightful article, though Mr Peng is more of a geek than a normal high achiever. The smart students don't have to study very hard, and many of them would have received special admission without going through Gaokao, those who does are certainly not the best ones, one reason is that even the best ones are afraid to mess up the exams.

Testing a this level is not only anti-social but favors people with Aspergers or other autistic related syndromes. Of course this is nothing new in Chinese history. The students of the Chinese civil service exams thousands of years ago did cram-fests on obscure Confucian topics which make today's achieving students look like slackers.

The best approach is something multidisciplinary. For example, many US Ivy league schools look for students with multiple strengths. A student who excels at sports, musical virtuosity, student government, or other team/artistic endeavors is given consideration. Of course, they still need to have reasonably strong SAT scores and be in the top ~10% of their class.

India is not far off on their narrow educational system either. I've dealt with many otherwise intelligent Indian engineers in the US who have very limited understanding outside their narrow profession. They have no interest in sports (other than occasionally cricket), music, or non-Indian food. It is painful to be with them at a cocktail parties or when making analogies.

A geek is a geek is a geek. It has nothing to with nationality. Try asking any American geeks about things outside the US, the likely results will be the same as it would be an Indian / Chinese engineer.

You are right. People interested in sports learn nothing about the outside world. For example, those watching the 205 nation Olympics this summer will learn nothing. Especially those athletes attending will learning nothing about the outside world. Better to be locked alone in a room studying for an exam.

Hard tests are bad because they might let those uncool asperger's types sneak through...
Engineers are boring nerds who must be forced to take time away from doing productive things so they can learn to properly appreciate the joy of sports and so be better company at parties...
Sports good... sports good... sports good...

I must say you certainly don't seem to take too kindly to the intelligent folk. I imagine you yourself must be one of those few 'special people' who watch Revenge of the Nerds and root for the jocks! With attitudes like this among college admissions types it's no wonder that the US economy is in the toilet!

Most of the commenters from China think it is a good and fair system, but you not. Who need to change ?

BTW You may think the old imperial examination was outdated. If you know the questions which the students had to answer, you will be really surprise, how diversified it was. I heard of some already, it was really up-to-Dates!!

Not denying that some people like it a lot. I don't know anyone personally in China who thinks it's a good system. Usually the only response they have is "China has too many people, there's no way else to manage it." But that says nothing about whether or not it's a good and fair system.

Since the Chinese invented the standardized test, I guess I have very high expectations that they can create the sort of world-standard for standardized testing. But the system today is very meh.

Gaokao sounds like a gamble despite definitely a more skillful one: Fair to everyone, and always a zero-sum game. Some score their fruits and change their life, and many have to fail because top 5 universities only have vacancies to serve 0.2% of Gaokao students. It gives a hope, but mostly it's a wishful thinking, and a loss of many good moments in adolescence life.

There is a market failure here. Chinese students spend too much time and energy preparing for the gaokao because it allows them to get into a top 5 university, which allows them to get a fast-track job in the Communist party heirarchy or in a big state-owned enterprise. The market failure is that it is not in China's best interest that students spend so much time preparing for a test of rote memory. If the market was functioning properly, the oversupply of bright youngsters desiring to follow this path would lead to a decrease in the rewards for following it. The fact that a fast-track job in the Communist Party or SOE is so highly rewarded is an economic failure, caused by a political failure.
Many countries share this problem. American students spend far too much time and money preparing for tests and jumping through other hoops in hopes of getting an Ivy League education, which greatly increases one's chances of a career as an over-compensated financier on Wall Street. France's students aim for the Grand Ecoles, from which the leaders of France's government and leading businesses are chosen. America's problem is poor regulation of the financial industry allowing fortune-hunting by rent-seekers. France's problem is a too-cosy elite overly reliant on personal contacts within an excessively centralized system. In each case a political flaw is causing an economic distortion, which sends signals to students and the families encouraging them to devote far too much time and energy to standardized testing. Cramming for entrance exams is less about working hard for your future as it is about paying the price for flaws in a country's system of governance.

I think the Economist does not go deeper about the unfairness / fairness of Guokuo compared to other systems. Take for example in the US, if you are in some poor states with few good universities, its almost as difficult to get into the top state university in another state. If you are from Arkansas your chance of getting into UCLA is most likely 10 times harder then its is for a California Resident. You have to score in top 1% percentile compared to the top 10% for a local.

Somewhat, the California university systems (state, UC, poly) all receive federal funding; however, the bulk of their funds comes from the State of Califonia. In fact, the university systems account for 9% of the state budget (after welfare 31.8%, K-12 28%, and before prisons at 6.3%).

Even so, most of America's elite universities are private institutions and many of them are keen to have a geographically diverse student bodies. For this reason, out-of-state applicants may enjoy an advantage.

Since public universities get a significant share of their funding from state coffers, they feel obliged to make most of their slots available to the children of tax-paying state residents.

That's not true for Quebec, where students whose parents are residents or from French-speaking countries (France, French-speaking Africa, etc.) pay the least, then students with parents from other Canadian provinces pay more and finally other international students pay the most.

It's systemic, the US created the state-based systems to foster competition. Since it's state-funded, it gives preference to in-state residents. Not that it's any better or worse than other systems, but that's the reasoning.

In the US, people can freely move between states. There are certain in-state residency requirements, but I think if you live in California for a year or two, you qualify for in-state tuition. In China the hukou system prevents this.

Also, is the quality of education at UCLA 10x that of University of Alabama? I don't know how you could quantify that, but I doubt the gap is so large. What about the difference between University of Xinjiang and Tsinghua? I would bet the gap between the two would be enormous.

Hello Friend ,
China is unitary state ,US is federal state.
You know the china central goverment offer most high education funds ,like
PKU all funds provide by department of education,not by bejing goverment ,so
how can we compare with USA ?

And the Hukou Stytem,It is very hard if you from Jiangxi get a Beijing hukou,how about US ? It is hard for a person from arkansas become a california resident ?

It is interesting to see how China has recreated the examination based system that served it so well in the past. After all for at least 2000 years China was the leading social, economic, political and technological nation. All that is missing is the Emperor but perhaps the Party will continue to play that role. In a century or two the revolutions of the last hundred years may be seen to be less of a departure from the past and more a continuation of China's historical model.

Test are a perfectly valid way to measure a students performance, and is meant to measure basic knowledge.

Other skill sets like socialization, leadership, teamwork cannot be measured on a test, but if a student has the wherewithal to perform well on a test, then it probably is a good indication that they will have no problems picking up these other skill sets.

Tests are an imperfect market signal. That means that doing well in a test is not an assurance that one will be succesful in the professional life. Of course, it can be a good indicator but as I said not a perfect one. I am sure many of us know people who did not do that well in school or in college but have become successful business people (

I don't think those sort of tests give a good indication that social skills, creativity and other such skills will be picked up that easily by students, because they belong to a different set of skills. Those really depend on the personaltity and the willingness to put yourself out to new and challenging situations.

If you just focus on a test you will lose a lot of perspective about a person. That is why interviews exist (at least that gives you a better feeling of a person). Sure, not perfect but that's something.

Agreed, it does not give a measure of creativity. Or working with others either. I'd much rather work with someone with slightly less test scores but with a background on team sports or organized music groups.

The West overstresses creativity to the destriment of learning and proficiency.

Most people are naturally creative, the difference is if that person has the right skill set (tools) and is proficient enough to be creative, wether its the written word, math or programming languages, one must be proficient before being able to be creative in whatever field they wish to innovate or excel in.

I believe this is why the West concentrates on useless degrees, that give no real proficiency in fields that need creativity (Engineering, Medicine). Being creative (art history degree?) but unable to use or master a tool set/skill set (Learning) makes that creativity useless.

HyunSmith, if this were true then China would be a bastion of technological and creative superiority. It's run a standardized test system for thousands of years.

Did Steve Jobs become successful because he was a bookworm? No, he was a troublemaker in school, dropped out of college, and sat in on calligraphy classes. If he was Chinese, he probably would have had a life of poverty. Yet instead he created hundreds of thousands of jobs worldwide.

Maybe you should not talk unnecessarily unless you know what's it's like to live a life of an aspirant in a country where 600 thousand people fight for 5 thousand seats.Maybe you should try it n then try to carry on with your music intrests.The indian engineers you are talking about have survived such a competition n you think they are not interested in enjoying there life sir we live in a world where we are not entitled to these privilages. maybe you should try livin like us for sometime then try talking.

As far as I am concerned, gaokao need to be reformed.And,I believe that the majority of chinese people have realized the defect of gaokao. But there is little people making proposals,but the complaints. Somenoe rather select escape this competition.So,in fact,the proposals are most important.

The dreaded high school exit/college entrance exam exist in just about every country. In China there's the exam discussed in this article, but that's not much different from the O level and A level exams in GB and the commonwealth, or the SAT in the US. Just look at the test prep industry the SAT has spawned. College admissions and rankings in the US both rely heavily on SAT scores. Just last week the NYTimes had an article on ADHD med like ritalin now widely used by high school students as SAT study drug.

Whether we like it or not, these exams are the only fair and objective way to assess a large number of applicants, since it's impossible to interview each individually. Except on cases of cheating, these exams also is one way to separate those who are intelligent, driven and hard working from those who are not, and in the end, those are probably the 3 qualities that will drive a person to succeed.

But schools do not rely exclusively on the SAT, grades and extracurriculars are also heavily weighed for students who may be outstanding but no necessarily great test takers; this also takes into account that tests cannot measure personal charisma. Additionally for those who don't do so well on the SAT there is also the ACT.

Our best course in life is to make the right decisions at the right time.

Action is better than being right yet paralyzed by inaction.

You don't need a Phd to have common sense.

Common sense is rarely common.

We should not seek knowledge as much as seek to develop our judgement. Our education system is too fixated at the former, and cannot comprehend the latter.

Education is a form of insurance, but tragedies also happen to the heavily insured.

One of the more painful but necessary roles of education is to sort young persons into appropriate vocations for their abilities. That means failing some students, limiting college and redirecting some to skilled professions. It is necessary as it is heartbreaking.

Hopefully we have the rational basis to make good decisions, but even ignorant people can act correctly--simple chance probability. "Doing the right thing for the wrong reason."

Ignorance is bliss. But no one should aspire to ignorance.

Errors will be made over a lifetime--hopefully they are small and recoverable. Being born rich is means you have more margin for errors--—more reserves, better insurance. But you can still screw up and disappoint the old man.

Smart men learn from their mistakes. Wise men learn from the mistakes of others.

Denial is not just a river in Egypt. It is the basis of rotten decision making processes.

Up to 38% of Europeans have a diagnosable mental illness that cause some impairment in their lives.

Know Dysfunction when you see it: government, societal, economic and most importantly personal and psychological.

Our worst enemies can be ourselves. That is why Democracies are failing today: Personal Failings.

Mental illness is probably the most underrated cause of world misery and suffering.

Assume 40% of a population has Mental Illness. Democracies Fail because they allow the vote of a mentally ill, judgement-impaired individual to be the equal to a sane, rational individual. And therefore crazy policies get approved and enacted.

Government should be conducted by the sane.***(This is harder than you think!)

The winners in the world are nations that are less encumbered by mental illness. Note half of the Jews are in some kind of psychological therapy--that is one reason why they tend to succeed in the world: They seek mental health and combat dysfunction.

Probably just as important as education, is proper screening and treatment for mental illness. Developing the mind and not cultivating dysfunctional behavior and wasting lives.

"Assume 40% of a population has Mental Illness. Democracies Fail because they allow the vote of a mentally ill, judgement-impaired individual to be the equal to a sane, rational individual"...

Have you ever had a conversation with a Tea Party member?
Ask them a simple question: How old is the Earth?
They do not believe in evolution, Global climate change or the existence of outside opinions.

I think seeking mental health wellness is a healthy thing, no different than getting your cholesterol checked.

Hey CTD, I'm "a Tea Party Person" and I believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old and that evolution is the source of speciation on the planet.

People who don't agree with you are simply crazy? Not very generous of you, maybe we're only stupid. But not so stupid as to completely place our trust in smart people like you and surrender our right to decide our lives for ourselves.

I guess its the story of most of the developing countries where for poor people education is the only way to have a better future. Something similar exists in India where around 500,000 students fight for some 5,000 seats. With all the flaws of burdening young students with parental pressure and a dream successful future such exams do fulfill their purpose. There has been an ongoing debate in India very similar to what has been proposed in the article about widespread training and rote learning culture.
At least in China number of such students are decreasing which is a good sign whereas in India it has been increasing over the year. The basic problem in all such countries is imbalance between demand and supply which is what you don't observe in other developed countries like US/UK where there are not just 4-5 good universities but many more.

Exactly. Just like the SAT, which was devised as the great equalizer. The SAT doesn't care if you are rich or poor, if you are smart and willing to study hard, you will do well. These are methods that have worked for decades, or in China's case, centuries. But in the US the liberals aka great social engineers are constantly harping on it...cultural bias, socio-economic bias(supposedly only rich kids who can afford test prep do well) etc. All are just making excuses for the low IQ and slackers who aren't willing to spend $15 on a workbook to study for it.

How is it fair? At best it's a test of where your parents sent you for high school, which tutoring services they've hired, and your own IQ. "Ordinary" people have inferior amounts of the first two and the latter seems at best random in relation to wealth.

I do not want return to gaokao anymore ,
It is a nightmare。They only want to see your score, not the ability like creativity, dealing with problem and so on. So when most student graduate from the university, they do not
know what they have learned and what they can do,what they want to do.

I am so excited that THE ECONOMIST are putting more and more eyes in China and her varies systems .2 years ahead ，I also attended GAOKAO and a not so good and not so bad mark ,then I entered Hainan University .I can not think out one way that can solve our nation ,which obtain so many citizens and students ,high school students how to enter university in a fair way .however ,I am sure that GAOKAO is not so suitable .

As a Chinese student who took the test seven years ago I just didn't take it seriously so I wasn't nervous then but I want to say if you have been given no second choice for more than 12 years how can remember how to make one after that.

For over a thousand years and through varied dynasties until the last emperor of Qing in 1900, national examinations have been a major path for Chinese youth to enter into government service. Many famous “Prime Ministers” and government officials throughout Chinese history had had been originated from the Number One pick (“Zhuang Yuan”) from such exams.

The "notoriously tough" National Higher Education Entrance Examination, or gaokao, is still the mainstream way to qualify a high school graduate to a college or university of his pick ranked by his/her test score. Being of the same Chinese tradition, Taiwan also administers its unified higher education entrance examination.

Of all the faults and critics being talked about, National Higher Education Entrance Examination, or gaokao, is IMO still the fairest way to measure a student’s qualification to a university of his preference.

But it does have a tendency to keep the star or strong university stronger with their first pick of cream puff students. It operates kind of in opposite to the national draft systems of American sports clubs’ NFL, NBA or baseball leagues where the idea is to let losers to make the first pick in an effort to make the weaker teams stronger.

But National Higher Education Entrance Examination is not “notoriously tough” anymore unless you have to go to top ranked universities. Of 9.25 million students who took the exam this year, about 76% of them are expected to be emplaced to some college or university.

While 9 million of college graduates a year is still inadequate for the size of Chinese population of 1.33 billion people, there has been an even more acute shortage in China for 2-year (or 5-year from junior high) technical school graduates for technicians, journeymen, shop foremen and other tradesmen. There, perhaps China could take a cue from Germany (if not already) for more master-apprenticeship type of work fellowship in factories in conjunction with the many new technical and trade schools being set up now in China.

As someone who took the exam years ago, I can not go away from my post above without adding that this Economist article depicts farily well China's National Higher Education Entrance Examination, or gaokao, in only a few simple paragraphs, rather objectively. And I appreciate that as a reader.

I took Gaokao 6 years ago, it guaranteed me a position in a reputable university in our country, what's more it offered the chance to get out of the small town and to live in a metropolitan. Yet it left me a vague impression. 6 years ago I was quite simple and innocent, pursuing a destination without too much pressure as well as extra tutoring.

But now I am in another metropolitan and unwilling to return to my hometown like thousands of peers, feeling a little tired to continuing the dream. The first step of gaokao is the milestone of my life. Yet there is still no clear answer whether I will make it or not.